A values-centered relational science model: supporting Indigenous rights and reconciliation in research

IF 3.6 2区 社会学 Q1 ECOLOGY Ecology and Society Pub Date : 2024-05-31 DOI:10.5751/es-14768-290211
Dominique M. David-Chavez, Michael C. Gavin, Norma Ortiz, Shelly Valdez, Stephanie Russo Carroll
{"title":"A values-centered relational science model: supporting Indigenous rights and reconciliation in research","authors":"Dominique M. David-Chavez, Michael C. Gavin, Norma Ortiz, Shelly Valdez, Stephanie Russo Carroll","doi":"10.5751/es-14768-290211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Addressing complex social-ecological issues requires all relevant sources of knowledge and data, especially those held by communities who remain close to the land. Centuries of oppression, extractive research practices, and misrepresentation have hindered balanced knowledge exchange with Indigenous communities and inhibited innovation and problem-solving capacity in all scientific fields. A recent shift in the research landscape reflects a growing interest in engaging across diverse communities and ways of knowing. Scientific discussions increasingly highlight the inherent value of Indigenous environmental ethics frameworks and processes as the original roadmaps for sustainable development planning, including their potential in addressing the climate crisis and related social and environmental concerns. Momentum in this shift is also propelled by an increasing body of research evidencing the role of Indigenous land stewardship for maintaining ecological health and biodiversity. However, a key challenge straining this movement lies rooted in colonial residue and ongoing actions that suppress and co-opt Indigenous knowledge systems. Scientists working with incomplete datasets privilege a handful of narratives, conceptual understandings, languages, and historical contexts, while failing to engage thousands of collective bodies of intergenerational, place-based knowledge systems. The current dominant colonial paradigm in scientific research risks continued harmful impacts to Indigenous communities that sustain diverse knowledge systems. Here, we outline how ethical standards in researcher practice can be raised in order to reconcile colonial legacies and ongoing settler colonial practices. We synthesize across Indigenous and community-based research protocols and frameworks, transferring knowledge across disciplines, and ground truthing methods and processes in our own practice, to present a relational science working model for supporting Indigenous rights and reconciliation in research. We maintain that core Indigenous values of integrity, respect, humility, and reciprocity should shape researcher responsibilities and methods applied in order to raise ethical standards and long-term relational accountability regarding Indigenous lands, rights, communities, and our shared futures.</p>\n<p>The post A values-centered relational science model: supporting Indigenous rights and reconciliation in research first appeared on Ecology & Society.</p>","PeriodicalId":51028,"journal":{"name":"Ecology and Society","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecology and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5751/es-14768-290211","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Addressing complex social-ecological issues requires all relevant sources of knowledge and data, especially those held by communities who remain close to the land. Centuries of oppression, extractive research practices, and misrepresentation have hindered balanced knowledge exchange with Indigenous communities and inhibited innovation and problem-solving capacity in all scientific fields. A recent shift in the research landscape reflects a growing interest in engaging across diverse communities and ways of knowing. Scientific discussions increasingly highlight the inherent value of Indigenous environmental ethics frameworks and processes as the original roadmaps for sustainable development planning, including their potential in addressing the climate crisis and related social and environmental concerns. Momentum in this shift is also propelled by an increasing body of research evidencing the role of Indigenous land stewardship for maintaining ecological health and biodiversity. However, a key challenge straining this movement lies rooted in colonial residue and ongoing actions that suppress and co-opt Indigenous knowledge systems. Scientists working with incomplete datasets privilege a handful of narratives, conceptual understandings, languages, and historical contexts, while failing to engage thousands of collective bodies of intergenerational, place-based knowledge systems. The current dominant colonial paradigm in scientific research risks continued harmful impacts to Indigenous communities that sustain diverse knowledge systems. Here, we outline how ethical standards in researcher practice can be raised in order to reconcile colonial legacies and ongoing settler colonial practices. We synthesize across Indigenous and community-based research protocols and frameworks, transferring knowledge across disciplines, and ground truthing methods and processes in our own practice, to present a relational science working model for supporting Indigenous rights and reconciliation in research. We maintain that core Indigenous values of integrity, respect, humility, and reciprocity should shape researcher responsibilities and methods applied in order to raise ethical standards and long-term relational accountability regarding Indigenous lands, rights, communities, and our shared futures.

The post A values-centered relational science model: supporting Indigenous rights and reconciliation in research first appeared on Ecology & Society.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以价值观为中心的关系科学模式:在研究中支持土著权利与和解
解决复杂的社会-生态问题需要所有相关的知识和数据来源,特别是那些与土地亲近的社区所掌握的知识和数据。几个世纪以来的压迫、榨取性研究实践和错误表述阻碍了与土著社区的均衡知识交流,抑制了所有科学领域的创新和解决问题的能力。最近,研究格局发生了变化,反映出人们对参与不同社区和认知方式的兴趣与日俱增。科学讨论日益强调土著环境伦理框架和进程作为可持续发展规划原始路线图的内在价值,包括其在解决气候危机及相关社会和环境问题方面的潜力。越来越多的研究证明了土著土地管理在维护生态健康和生物多样性方面的作用,这也推动了这一转变的势头。然而,压制这一运动的一个关键挑战源于殖民主义残余以及压制和收编土著知识体系的持续行动。科学家们在使用不完整的数据集时,对少数几种叙述、概念理解、语言和历史背景给予了特权,而没有让数以千计的世代相传、以地方为基础的知识体系集体参与进来。当前科学研究中占主导地位的殖民主义范式有可能继续对维持各种知识体系的土著社区造成有害影响。在此,我们概述了如何提高研究人员实践中的道德标准,以调和殖民遗产和正在进行的定居者殖民实践。我们综合了土著和基于社区的研究协议和框架、跨学科的知识转移,以及我们自身实践中的真实方法和过程,提出了在研究中支持土著权利与和解的关系科学工作模式。我们认为,正直、尊重、谦逊和互惠的土著核心价值观应影响研究人员的责任和应用的方法,以提高道德标准和有关土著土地、权利、社区和我们共同未来的长期关系责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ecology and Society
Ecology and Society 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
109
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Ecology and Society is an electronic, peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary journal devoted to the rapid dissemination of current research. Manuscript submission, peer review, and publication are all handled on the Internet. Software developed for the journal automates all clerical steps during peer review, facilitates a double-blind peer review process, and allows authors and editors to follow the progress of peer review on the Internet. As articles are accepted, they are published in an "Issue in Progress." At four month intervals the Issue-in-Progress is declared a New Issue, and subscribers receive the Table of Contents of the issue via email. Our turn-around time (submission to publication) averages around 350 days. We encourage publication of special features. Special features are comprised of a set of manuscripts that address a single theme, and include an introductory and summary manuscript. The individual contributions are published in regular issues, and the special feature manuscripts are linked through a table of contents and announced on the journal''s main page. The journal seeks papers that are novel, integrative and written in a way that is accessible to a wide audience that includes an array of disciplines from the natural sciences, social sciences, and the humanities concerned with the relationship between society and the life-supporting ecosystems on which human wellbeing ultimately depends.
期刊最新文献
Integrating a “One Well-being” approach in elephant conservation: evaluating consequences of management interventions Examining the influence of sociodemographics, residential segregation, and historical redlining on eBird and iNaturalist data disparities in three U.S. cities What does it take to build resilience against droughts in food value chains? Incorporating climate change into restoration decisions: perspectives from dam removal practitioners Exploring perceptions to improve the outcomes of a marine protected area
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1