Indigenous Environmental Justice and Sustainability: What Is Environmental Assimilation?

What Is Wellbeing, and What Is Important for Wellbeing? Indigenous Voices from across Canada

Indigenous peoples' perceptions of wellbeing differ from non-Indigenous constructs. Thus, it is imperative to recognize that Indigenous peoples will conceptualize wellbeing from their perspectives and set their own wellbeing priorities. In keeping with this viewpoint, the aims of the present study were to conceptualize wellbeing and determine what was (and is) important for wellbeing from Canadian Indigenous peoples' perspectives. In this paper, we take a partnership approach based on the elements of respect, equity, and empowerment. One primary data source and two existing data sources were examined and analyzed thematically utilizing a combination approach of deductive and inductive coding. Indigenous leadership and organizations viewed wellbeing holistically and conceptualized wellbeing multidimensionally. From across Canada, wellbeing was communicated as physical, economic, political, social, and cultural. The scaling of wellbeing represented a collectivist perspective, and land was the connecting thread between all types of wellbeing, being a place to practice cultural traditions, reassert one's Indigenous identity, find solace, and pass on Indigenous knowledge and languages. Although wellbeing was discussed in the context of the individual, family, community, and nation, wellbeing was most often discussed at the cultural level by regional and national Indigenous leadership and organizations. Even in acknowledging the great cultural diversity among Canadian Indigenous nations, four concordant themes were identified regionally and nationally, with respect to what was important for cultural wellbeing: land and water, sustainability, and inherent obligations; being on the land, and indigenous languages and knowledge systems; sustainable development; and meaningful involvement in decision-making, and free, prior, and informed consent. Taking into account these themes is foundational for any interaction with Indigenous peoples, especially in the context of land, culture, and development. There needs to be a new beginning on the journey to reconciliation with land and cultural wellbeing at the forefront.

Indigenous Land-Based Approaches to Well-Being: The Niska (Goose) Harvesting Program in Subarctic Ontario, Canada

Historically, goose harvesting provided a source of culturally significant, safe, and nutritious food for the Omushkego Cree of subarctic Ontario, Canada. Disruptions stemming from colonization and climate change have led to a decrease in harvesting, resulting in higher rates of food insecurity. The aim of the Niska program was to reconnect Elders and youth to revitalize goose harvesting activities and associated Indigenous knowledge within the community. The program and evaluation were built using a two-eyed seeing (Etuaptmumk) and community-based participatory research approach. Salivary cortisol, a biomedical measure of stress, was collected before (n = 13) and after (n = 13) participation in the spring harvest. Likewise, cortisol samples were collected before (n = 12) and after (n = 12) the summer harvest. Photovoice and semi-directed interviews were employed after the spring (n = 13) and summer (n = 12) harvests to identify key elements of well-being from an Indigenous perspective. The changes observed in cortisol levels for the spring (p = 0.782) and summer (p = 0.395) harvests were not statistically significant. However, there was a noteworthy increase in the subjective well-being observed through the qualitative measures (semi-directed interviews and photovoice), highlighting the importance of using multiple perspectives when assessing well-being, especially in Indigenous peoples. Future programs should incorporate multiple perspectives when addressing complex environmental and health issues, such as food security and environmental conservation, especially in Indigenous homelands worldwide.

Indigenous Land-Based Approaches to Well-Being: The Amisk (Beaver) Harvesting Program in Subarctic Ontario, Canada

The act of decolonizing knowledge systems involves recovering and renewing traditional, non-commodified cultural patterns, such as the sustenance of intergenerational relationships and traditional practices. A decline in beaver harvesting, which was once an integral part of the Omushkego Cree culture, has resulted in an overabundance of beavers and dams, which has negatively affected communities by increasing the local flooding events and impacting the water quality. The aim of the Amisk (beaver) program was to reconnect the Elders and youth to revitalize traditional on-the-land activities and, in the present case, beaver harvesting and associated activities within the community. The program and evaluation were built using a two-eyed seeing (Etuaptmumk) and community-based participatory research approach. Salivary cortisol, a biomedical measure of stress, was collected before and after participation in the program. Photovoice, along with semi-directed interviews, were employed to identify the key elements of well-being from a First Nations’ perspective. For the beaver harvesting activities, the changes observed in the cortisol concentrations were not statistically significant (p = 0.094). However, the act of beaver dam removal was associated with a statistically significant increase in the post-participation cortisol concentration (p = 0.021). It was noteworthy that increased stress during the removal of the beaver dams–as indicated by the elevated post-activity cortisol levels–were not reflected in a decrease in the qualitative measures (semi-directed interviews and photovoice) of well-being from an Indigenous perspective. In fact, there was a noted increase in the subjective well-being of the participants, which highlights the importance of multiple perspectives when assessing well-being, especially in Indigenous peoples. However, the cortisol findings of the present pilot project need to be interpreted with caution, due to the limited sample sizes.

Canada’s Impact Assessment Act, 2019: Indigenous Peoples, Cultural Sustainability, and Environmental Justice

It is well documented that the colonizers of Canada have long coveted the ancestral homelands of the Canadian Indigenous peoples for settlement and development. With this end goal in mind, it is not surprising that there exists an extensive history of assimilative efforts by the colonizers with respect to the Indigenous peoples of Canada—for example, legal assimilation through enfranchisement (voluntary and involuntary) and blood quantum requirements, and cultural assimilation through residential schools and the “sixties scoop”. Another form of assimilation is environmental assimilation, that is, colonial development on Indigenous homelands to the extent whereby Indigenous cultural activities can no longer be supported in the development-transformed environment. Herein, I examine Bill C-69, a Government of Canada omnibus bill, through an environmental justice lens in the context of development across Canada on Indigenous homelands and impacts on Indigenous cultural sustainability. Specifically, Part 1 (i.e., the Impact Assessment Act, 2019) and Part 3 (i.e., the Canadian Navigable Waters Act, 2019) of Bill C-69 pose significant threats to Indigenous cultural sustainability. Through an environmental justice lens, procedural aspects include the use of the project list and scheduled waterways, the discretionary decision-making powers of the Government of Canada representatives, and the lack of acknowledgement of procedural elements of the environmental assessment processes that are constitutionally protected in comprehensive land claims. While, distributive justice aspects consist of unsustainable development from an Indigenous perspective, whereby environmental costs and benefits have been (and will be) distributed inequitably. Bill C-69 is a flawed statute that reinforces the colonial policy of assimilation.

Green Energy—Green for Whom? A Case Study of the Kabinakagami River Waterpower Project in Northern Canada

Green energy has become a term that heralds efforts of environmental conservation and protection worldwide; however, much of it is marred with questions of what it means to be green. More precisely, it has become a question of Green for whom? While many of the impacts of supposed green energy projects are local in their reach, some may be more regional in their scope, such as hydroelectric power. Hydroelectric power generation negatively impacts the environment and people who rely on the environment for sustenance, such as, Indigenous peoples of northern Canada. Taking into account their position with respect to the areas impacted by these green projects, many Indigenous peoples have voiced their concerns and doubts concerning green energy, which is purported to be a mode of energy production that champions the environment. The Kabinakagami River Waterpower Project serves as a case study for both the potential effects of the project and the different views associated with these endeavors. If nothing else, the accounts and testimonies found within shall stand as a testament to the hubris of calling an energy project green without properly assessing and considering the impacts. While these statements relate to the case presented, they also carry significance in the wider world due to the numerous Indigenous communities around the world that are having their spaces slowly being encroached upon in the name of sustainable growth, or green energy. This will especially be true in the post-COVID-19 period where green energy and a green economy are being touted as a way towards state and worldwide recovery.